kye

I don't see your problem, just build strength by carrying around a brick all day when you're at home or running errands.
It's a standard industry strength training practice.
This photo shows a steadicam operator popping down to the shops on his day off:

 

I have the GH5 and GX85.
The GH5 was my default body, and I used it with the Laowa 7.5mm F2, the Voigtlander 17.5mm F0.95 and the Voigtlander 42.5mm F0.95.  Occasionally I'd use a longer lens for wildlife etc, like the FD 70-210mm F4, or the Tokina 400mm F5.6.  I would carry the 12-35mm F2.8 for difficult situations where I need very fast zooming or extra IS.
That was up until a recent trip when I discovered the GX85 with the 14mm F2.5 pancake lens combo.  Not only did I fall in love with the size of the setup, and the lack of attention it raised, but I also discovered that the AF-S was extremely useful and the DoF was adequate.  
I've since come upon the idea that there are three setups that I think I will pursue:
GX85 with 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 zoom lens
Having a 10X zoom lens will be liberating because I'll be able to shoot whatever compositions I can see, the AF-S will allow me to work really quickly, and (after spending a lot of time with a DoF calculator) I realised that the DoF should be sufficient for the work I do.  This is a day-time setup.
Interestingly, this lens is the same size as the 12-35mm F2.8 lens, so not too bad in practice. GX85 with 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 pancake lens
Compact walk-around setup when size really matters, and still gives a good zoom range.  Similar use-case to the above. GX85 with 7.5mm F2, TTartisan 17mm F1.4, and TTartisan 50mm F1.2 lenses
This is the low-light setup. All that is in combination with iPhone, and especially the wide camera, which acts as a second body and gives quick access to a super-wide angle.
If I was going somewhere that camera size didn't really matter, like doing a tour with a busload of tourists, then I'd consider taking the GH5 instead, but I'm struggling to put my finger on why it would be that much better.  I know it has various better specs, but in reality I'm only doing home video stuff, so the shooting experience and the reaction of people in-frame matters more than DR etc.
My philosophy is to think hard about how I shoot and what I am trying to achieve and to challenge my assumptions.  Hope this is useful 🙂 

I don't think it works that way though.  A 12K sensor would be sensitive to moire if there were repeating patterns that happened to align with the gaps between the pixels, just like a 4K sensor.  
It might be that common causes of moire are around a certain size and therefore impact one combination of sensor resolution / sensor size / and focal length more than other combinations.  Also, lower resolution sensors might be more prone to moire as they're typically older and there were larger gaps between the pixels than there are now.
Lower resolutions are likely to have issues on cheaper cameras too, due to the camera line skipping and therefore effectively creating very large gaps between the active pixels.  
Sadly, there's lots of different ways to create moire, and many of them tend to come from strategies to make the product more affordable!

Panasonic S5 II + BRAW vs BMPCC 6K Pro FF - as expected practically no difference in image quality. Downloadable source files are available too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuzKtL8p5M8a
 

Size will be the problem...
These are both 40mm FOVs.

Sure, the MFT is 20mm F1.7, which is about one stop deeper DoF but that's the slowest 40mm prime Sony make.
I actually don't care about the sensor size anymore, the FX3 is quite a small camera, the issue is that the lenses just aren't.
It might be big enough, assuming you can position it as anything other than a FF camera with a lens glued on the front that you can't change.  It has to be seen as a creative limitation, as something MORE elegant and creative, rather than just limiting.
I've seen people talk about cameras like the Leicas like that, and the Ricoh ones too, but I'm not sure that companies like Sony could pull off that kind of perception shift.

Yes there is only a few limited options for 4k240 .... RED and Blackmagic have models but are heavy crop, Freefly Ember but it is very specialized and expensive.

If you have a sharp and high shutter speed image at 4k 120fps to start with Davinci Resolve 18 with retime: OpticalFlow and motion estimation: Speed Wrap, does a quite good job interpolating frames, here a complex background and movement example that I tried a couple of weeks a ago:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5gxj6KVBoY

Look at the horse tail for me is quite impressive.

I remember it as ‘small sensor cameras full stop’ which was everything sub 4/3rds.
But could be wrong!

Oh yeah, that would be perfect!  
I didn't know it took RS into account, that's cool.  It makes sense because the data is all there.  
Hopefully we're heading towards a common gyro data standard, or at least a set of standards, that can be used for things like this.  I'd happily shoot without an ND, then apply stabilisation and blur based on gyro data, then apply any lens simulations, then colour grade on top of that!

I have a feeling I might reach as much as 28 minutes of 4k 120fps before the buffer even fills up. I reckon the G9ii has about 8gb of internal buffer (which is amazing).

They announced officially earlier this year they were moving out of the compact market, so unless they reverse what sounded like a very firm decision…

I wouldn't complain either. With all the smaller cameras, it's always a give and take. The masses are no longer going to be buying them; so, make us a camera with much better ergos but small. It must be possible:

For me, I don't want the flash, but keep the hot shoe. Also, I don't want the EVF, I'd prefer a better flip-up screen and making it smaller. Also, I don't like the camera strap attachments like that. I'd prefer the ones on the G9 ii/S5. In terms of IO, just give us a mic jack.
For key specs, I want full-sensor readout and PDAF. Don't need 60fps or even 120fps, but I wouldn't whine if were in there. The other specs are just fine for me, especially the shutter (1/250 sync).
Maybe that camera wouldn't sell very well, but I'd get it. OMDS came close with the E-P7, which was great, but mine broke and they're still too expensive used. They also cheaped out with no PDAF, and the sub-par plastics (it creaks when you hold it, but it's only 337g). The E-P7 had decent IBIS and controls (two usable dials on top). It has full-sensor readout too. It had 120fps at 1080p. No mic jack though.

For many, the lack of EVF is a no-go, but I just don't like the hesitation I have over which one to use. For me, less is more in this case.
Yes, we need more contrast in the Panasonic line-up. Big-bodied FF and M43 is not enough. We need core Panasonic features in a tiny body too.
At this point, I think they should just forget about the existence of camera phones- they won the bad ergonomics point and shoot market. Let's just make a camera that enthusiasts will buy. IMO, the problem with phones is ergos and there's no way around it or it will no longer be a phone. Anything they do to "make it better" for photographers will make it clunky and not sell to the masses. Inherently, phones and cameras are different devices, for the same reason cinema cameras and camcorders will always have an edge on hybrid cameras for video. Hybrid cameras will always have and edge on cinema cameras and camcorders for photos.
 

With the success of the x100v, I wonder why there hasn't been a large sensor compact refresh from Panny. The LX100 ii was barely an update too, I just don't understand...its one of my favorite cameras.

I'd love to see an update to the LX100. Add IBIS and PDAF, maybe ruggedize the body a bit, more modern video specs, tilt screen, bam.
Maybe offer a vlog variant where the screen tilts but can also flip up over the top of the cam (like some of the RX100 versions do), with a 16-35 or 20-50 equiv lens.

I have a strange relationship with the GX85, now that I've gotten sufficiently good at colour grading - I don't feel limited by it.  Of course, if they were to increase the DR, improve low-light performance, add 10-bit, etc etc, then I'd be happy, but I'm not chafing at the bit for those things.  
What I wouldn't mind though, is having a log profile.  And not a "V-Log L" style unsupported thing, I mean a real log profile that's supported with professional specifications.  Apple did it with a phone, so there's no excuses now.  They might need to add 10-bit for that, but so be it.
There is quite a bit of info about Panasonics future plans.
For example, this says that Panasonic has registered two new cameras, likely on higher end and one lower end:
https://www.43rumors.com/panasonic-officially-registered-another-new-model-in-china-we-now-have-two-cameras-coming-soon/
This article from France suggests that they're selling well there, that although the compact camera market was crushed by covid, their sales are increasing due to competitors leaving the market segment, and that expert users prefer compact cameras with interchangeable lenses instead of expert compacts:
https://phototrend-fr.translate.goog/2023/10/interview-panasonic-salon-de-la-photo-2023/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp
That's all hedging-our-bets marketing-speak of course, but it sounds to me like Panasonic might be keeping its eye on the compact market segment with the view to having a large share of a relatively small market.
We all know that smartphones ate the point-and-shoot fixed lens market, but interchangeable lens cameras will always have a huge advantage over smartphones in this regard, so I think there will always be demand of some sort.
The Resolve v18.1 manual is 4036 pages.  They're up to 18.6 so I'd say that one is longer still.

They should really do a GX9 II with the same pdaf sensor..
 https://fstoppers.com/reviews/panasonic-please-come-back-lumix-gx9-re-review-645313

There's skin in this one, just for you.
 

People seem to be obsessed with nit-picking the colour science of cameras, but indicate they don't colour grade for one reason or another.
To me, even a few simple adjustments can improve the image so much more than the differences in colour science between manufacturers.  In fact, the image out of camera is like a plain sponge cake straight out of the oven - it's nice and the quality matters but it's far from the final result.
Colour grading is also talked about as being super complicated, and it can be, but it doesn't have to be.  Simple grades can still be really powerful.
Here are some examples from online, to show how much of a nice image is camera colour science and how much is colour grading.
ARRI  LOG:

With ARRIs LUT:

Grade:

The above grade was done using only white balance, the lift / gamma / gain controls, a vignette, log wheels, in that order.
To look at skin tones, the holy grail of camera colour science - here's a before and after....   before:

Then on top of the previous look, here's additional treatments to give it more of a film look.

These additional adjustments were: Gain (to lower exposure), white balance, saturation (lowered), darken shadows, in that order.
Which was inspired by this frame from Sicario:

Here's the video showing the whole grade: https://youtu.be/8GkcqEA72QM
 
Next example - SOOC:

with 709 conversion:

Grade:

Video link: https://youtu.be/fRDjEB6ryyQ
 
Next one - with 709 conversion:

Grade:

Video: https://youtu.be/OmBBYHMi_ek
 
Next one - SOOC:

With 709 conversion: 

Grade:

Video: https://youtu.be/UNW_8jcGJqw
 
There are literally more examples online to count, but I just focused on the more neutral looking colour grades, as the people doing dirty film grades probably don't care about skin tone minutia when they're going to pummel the image with Dehancer etc.
So, what's the TLDR?
Even half-a-dozen simple steps applied in addition to the manufacturers LUT can make a huge difference It's about making small changes to make the image look slightly nicer, and they add up The reason that fancy cameras look incredible is because the colourist takes the great work done on set and expands on it How do I get started?
Look at the image and work out what tool might improve it (if you have no idea, just try the basic ones) Wiggle whatever tool back and forth, deliberately going too far one way and too far the other way, then find the best spot Compare the adjustment you just make to see if it makes the image better or worse, if it's better then keep it, otherwise undo
(sometimes a really good adjustment will look completely natural and the 'before' will look like something is being applied to the image and is damaging it) Go to 1. Repeat until you can't find anything that makes the image look better. If you're using another image to inspire your look, then for step 1, just look at both images and work out what looks different about yours, and try and fix it.  Is it brighter? Darker?  More contrasty?  A different colour?  More or less saturated?  Adding a vignette to lighten your subject or darken the other areas of the frame is a good trick.  Looking to find anything in the frame that's distracting and de-emphasising it is really useful too - even just lowering the brightness or saturation can really stop it from fighting for attention.
Even by the time you've adjusted these basic tools, you'll be well ahead.  

Welcome to the free peer-to-peer colour grading course! ???
The idea is that we all have things to learn from each other, so we all grade the same clip and then you explain what you did if someone is interested in your grade.
These are the rules:
No criticism.  NO CRITICISM!!  Seriously. If someone asks for constructive feedback then sure, give a few helpful pointers (and not an essay), but this thread is about learning from each others strengths, not pointing out each others weaknesses. We are here because we are not professional colourists, and some of us only do this for fun and aren't pros, so give us a break. If we criticise then no one will grade, and... If no-one grades, no-one learns anything. You don't have to grade to participate, but please do if you are able to. You can post multiple grades if you want.  Try different looks, see what works and what other people might like.  Grading is subjective. Anyone is free to post a clip/still to grade, BUT, You must post two grades of other clips before you post your clip for grading.  Otherwise we'll have a thread full of clips and no grades.  See rule #2. If you post a clip, please include what colour/gamma profile it was shot in.  This helps to transform the colour space. Please post the file SOOC if possible (if it's not too large a file size) or at least a completely ungraded unprocessed clip from that file.  Be sure to maintain bit-depth and resolution. Please post relatively nice clips, not ones that are impossible.  Try to remember that we're trying to learn colour grading, not show off our troubleshooting skills. Don't be an asshole.  Seriously, just play nice and get along I am serious about Rule #1.  Posting your creative work is an act of courage - criticising others is an act of cowardice.  If you are an asshole I will call you out, and I will not be polite about it.
All that said, here's clip number one.  Have at it!
https://www.sugarsync.com/pf/D8480669_08693060_6029821
Clip shot with GH5 in 150Mbps 4K HLG, shot with sharpening turned all the way down.  I have reason to believe that the HLG on the GH5 is neither rec.2100 nor rec.2020, but rec2100 is probably good enough to get a decent grade.  I shoot auto-WB so it probably needs adjusting, and there's a bit of noise too, but it's not too far gone - I shoot in way worse conditions than this.  The clip is from a tour of a traditional village temple in Nha Trang Vietnam.

Gratuitous very tenuous link to post, but just for ‘proof’, my daughters little story on IG…
 

At 658g, I guess the G9 ii isn't so bad. It gives 842g of lens and accessories. Here are some of the fastest setups and weights:
G9 ii + Panasonic 9mm f/1.7 = 788g
G9 ii + Olympus 17mm f/1.2 = 1048g
G9 ii + Olympus 25mm f/1.2 = 1068g
G9 ii + Olympus 45mm f/1.2 = 1068g
G9 ii + Olympus 75mm f/1.8 = 963g
G9 ii + Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 = 1418g
G9 ii + Olympus 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 = 1081g
There are some nicer lenses at the telephoto end, but many put us over the mark as you'd expect.

It will depend of course on the individual but for me, for stills, under 1kg is fine but for video, I prefer around 1.5kg as a sweet spot, as I find that is a nice stable platform and not too heavy.
Over 2.5kg is for me getting a bit much. A bit much as in it’s not that heavy per se, but over the course of a long shoot, hanging off your hip (best IMO) or sling (going to feel that one very quickly!) not desirable.
I am currently debating first of all Lumix vs Nikon for video…but that is another topic entirely and not relevant, but whether I go:
A. Hybrid units; 1 static, 1 light (1kg) most of the day, 1 heavy (<2kg) various times but not all day, or,
B. Video and photo units; 1 static video, 1 roaming video (1.5kg), 2x stills (1kg + 1.25kg).
Pros and cons for each and for me to work out but bottom line is I am ‘happy’ to go up to 2.5kg for a single unit, but only if I will not be using it all the time.
On me, either attached or in hand, 2kg max is about the max based on my experience that I would be comfortable with for video and 1.5kg for stills.

I also need a day rest to fully recover from previous day, if I did back to back shoot I will be very tired on 3rd day.
The days of flying C70 with 18-35mm 1.8 on Ronin all day is definitely past my time.
So this year I downsize my setup to rs3 mini and ZV-E1 with <500g lens (or R8 with 600g lens) instead of the hefty 24-70 2.8 on R5 on Ronin rs2 pro, that is over 1/2 the weight saved, with this new setup I m not as over tiring as before which is good for me.

This conversation begs the question: what is the acceptable weight for a handheld setup? IMO, 1.5kg is the upper limit. What do you think? BTW, I just turned 50.

It is.
Around a decade or so back, I was what is known as skinny fat, ie, very little muscle tone but a surplus of fat around my middle.
I never exercised, had developed asthma, smoked and drank (but not heavily) and it was a gradual erosion/accumulation more than anything.
I decided to do something about it around the time of my 40th birthday.
I’m 53 in a few weeks and never been in better condition and actually have a fitness competition (Hyrox) that I have traveled to Ireland for from France, in a couple of hours.
Why mention this?
Fatigue, or reduction of from being in shape.
And not just the physical, but the mental which is unseen but contributes.
But I still have trouble getting to sleep after an intense 15+ hour day because despite downing tools, I’m still buzzing.
The next day though…and I can never lie in and catch up no matter how late I went to bed or how tired I am, by lunchtime, wiped out and can easily grab another 1-2 hours early afternoon, but it’s not until the day after the day after I feel recovered, so never take back to back jobs anymore.
No way I could be working the way I have been for the last few years one to two decades ago and I guess another factor why when other photographers or videographers ask me how I do what I do, part of that answer is level of fitness.
But as with all these things, it is only a part of a greater whole.
2.8kg unsupported in and out of your hands all day though is a bit nuts which is why it has to go!